Jacob, Thanks for the perceptive comment. We are careful to say that in the paper that our differences-in-differences estimates are not rigorous impact evaluation estimates. Our paper argues for a rigorous impact evaluation design that the MVP could have implemented (and could still implement as it goes forward creating more sites.) To address your point directly: the Sauri MVP site constitutes 1.3% of the population of rural Nyanza, which we take as the first point of comparison for the changes in Sauri. While it is possible that there were some spillovers to neighboring areas, it is extremely unlikely that interventions at Sauri had measurable effects for rural Nyanza *as a whole*. We also compare what happened to Sauri with rural Kenya overall and all Kenya. The rates of growth of cell phone ownership are identical in all three areas. It is implausible that anything that happened in Sauri had any affect on cell phone ownership rates in the country as a whole. Even more broadly, there has been an explosion in cell phone ownership across sub-Saharan Africa, including in countries with no MVP sites. Collectively, this provides fairly strong evidence that the MVP has had no effect on cell phone ownership rates.